doctorsixstring: i wasn't being serious, i just forgot my < sarcasm > tags...

quote: Original post by TechnoGoth
Is it possible to make and rpg, adventure, or action game. That has no combat in it?

the problem with that is (generally) the main, most time-consuming, and only way to improve your character is through combat. so, if you cut out the combat completely, there will be nothing to do in the game ("go find me the crystal in the 7th level of that dungeon, to unlock a path to the next town, but don't worry; there is no monsters to fight on the way"). i mean, you could still go around finding things, and buying items (not heal potions or swords though)... and it turns into an adventure game without the great puzzles.

to make the game not completely suck, you would have to replace the combat with something else that takes just as much of the gameplay time as all the random fighting. this activity would have to allow for character improvement, and give you money when you win, so you can go buy stuff at the villages.

i never saw much combat in adventure games (unless you mean something other than those old sierra adventure games), as they were more about puzzles and such.

quote: And would such a game still appeal to a wide audience?

if you did it well, yes but a lot of the people who would buy "RPG SlaughterQuest for the UberSword" would be unhappy with it unless your combat-replacement was very neat.

[edited by - krez on July 8, 2003 4:37:11 PM]

it just occurred to me that you could abstract the combat, and use cards, or dice, or pokemon, or whatever the latest anime characters are playing with. thus, the conflict is still there, but instead of stabbing 8,000,000 goblins with your sword, you just end up playing cards/dice with 8,000,000 guys... instead of opponents killing each other, they lose a game and leave shamefully (or your pets can kill each other in the pokemon scenario).

but, that is not really non-combat IMHO, it is combat with a sugar-coating.

Umm... That''s pretty much how the Pokemon games for Nintendo''s systems (well, GameBoy atleast, since that''s all I''ve played) work. You assume the role of the annoying kid in the cartoon, and it''s basically an RPG but instead of fighting and improving yourself, you fight with and improve your pokemon.

But don''t be so quick to discount the Sierra-like games... Yes they''ve lost popularity because the static-background graphics style doesn''t really impress anyone, but the gameplay is still viable... Though very few (or no) companies seem to be willing to try this, it seems possible to make a game play like Space Quest or Leisure Suite Larry in full 3d graphics. The only attempt I''ve seen was the (previously mentioned) Longest Journey, which still used static pre-rendered backgrounds, but used 3d acceleration hardware to create the characters, items, etc. But I''m willing to bet that a full blown 3d game that played like King''s Quest could work, if done correctly.

-d-

I think I should clear up a misconception. Conflict doesen''t mean combat. There are many kinds of conflict form bashing each others heads in with a club. To a debate on the ethics of cloning. A conflict a strugggle between two or more forces.

A game should still be able to have conflict without the need to resolve it through combat.

Afterall in rpgs you earn experince for over coming obstacles it doesn''t have to be from kill goblins. You could award experince for each succful action whileinfiltrating the bandit camp and resucing the princess.

and Krez I''m not saying that you remove enimes from the game just that you remove the combat aspect. So while your in the dungeon trying to get the magic crystal on level seven. You have to find other ways to deal with the enimes then fighting them. The obvious methods that come to mind are, stealth, distraction, bribery, conversation, and chaos tactics.

instead trying the kill the 50 goblins guarding the magic crystal an endevour you would inverable lose. Instead you use your alchemy skills to brew a tastless, ordorless, sleeping potion which then convice the owner of the local brewery to add to the goblins next shipment of beer.

Theres just an example of the top of my head of how you could get the crystal without combat.

quote: Original post by krez
doctorsixstring: i wasn''t being serious, i just forgot my < sarcasm > tags...

Ah, I see. Sorry!

quote: Original post by Desco
But don''t be so quick to discount the Sierra-like games...

if it seemed i meant it that way, i am sorry. i loved those games, and i wish there was a modern-day equivalent (i would even play the old-school 2D ones, but i don''t think anyone even makes them anymore, and i''ve already played the old ones too much to forget all the puzzles)...

quote: Original post by TechnoGoth
A game should still be able to have conflict without the need to resolve it through combat.

i agree. but, most RPGs don''t factor that in (even the thief characters have to fight quite a bit, unfortunately).

quote: and Krez I''m not saying that you remove enimes from the game just that you remove the combat aspect. So while your in the dungeon trying to get the magic crystal on level seven. You have to find other ways to deal with the enimes then fighting them. The obvious methods that come to mind are, stealth, distraction, bribery, conversation, and chaos tactics.

very true... if you can pull it off nicely tell me so i can play it!

but, i can''t think of a way to do that that wouldn''t be extremely scripted, and therefore not very replayable.

quote: instead trying the kill the 50 goblins guarding the magic crystal an endevour you would inverable lose. Instead you use your alchemy skills to brew a tastless, ordorless, sleeping potion which then convice the owner of the local brewery to add to the goblins next shipment of beer.

sweet. but the engine will be a real bitch to get running IMO... it is easy to calculate how many HP you beat out of goblins, but how do you deal with the two goblins that don''t drink, and the other three with a high tolerance to sleeping potions? i think the game mechanics would be far from what is currently called an RPG... again, i do not think this is a bad thing, but you would have to work it out nicely to get people to love the game.

quote: Original post by krez
i can't think of a way to do that that wouldn't be extremely scripted, and therefore not very replayable.

I wouldn't be scripted per say, what would be required would be to have reactions programed into NPC's. For instance once of the tools your character posses is a bag of stones. Which you can throw, to cause various effect such noise. Throwing a stone at nearby wall would cause a noise effect that the NPC guard might go invesitage giving you a brief oppertunity to sneak by him. Or your facing the same guard but don't have any stones left, but you do have chicken leg. You take a look at the guard notce he's tired and hungry looking so use some fast talking and the chicken leg to convice him to let you by even though he doesn't recognize you.




[edited by - TechnoGoth on July 8, 2003 9:14:03 PM]

[edited by - TechnoGoth on July 8, 2003 9:17:04 PM]

sounds like a ton of work, but well worth it if you pull it off

quote: Original post by TechnoGoth
I''m curious as to what game player and developers think about combat in games. Is it possible to make and rpg, adventure, or action game. That has no combat in it? And would such a game still appeal to a wide audience?

Some games have, centipede is a good example, some of the other early great hits, but it would be hard to say if it would appeal to a wide audience. Mass medium ethics tells me no, but you could come up with some other approach that will work.